[HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore/LONG and bad, SKIP if you do not feel like reading it :-)

[Lynda Cordova]

No: HPFGUIDX 190972

Alla:
 > Fact - or at least we have not seen anything to the contrary in canon,
 > Dumbledore KNOWS that Tom Riddle is Lord Voldemort but does not tell
 > anybody. I do not care that Tom Riddle had a perfect reputation before
 > he dissappeared. Fact is voldemort is a magical mystery to everybody,
 > somebody who is supposedly so unknown to WW that he cannot be
 > defeated. Known evil is a lesser evil, thats just common sense to me
 > and Dumbledore does not tell anybody that Tom Riddle is a pitiful
 > human who has sociopathic tendencies, but not the mysterious creature,
 > who undergone those transformations?



 Lynda:

 Alla, I have read your posts for many years. I believe you are intelligent, knowledgable and under normal circumstances, logical. I also believe that when you read the HP books you read a completely different story than I did. It appears to me that when JK Rowling said that Dumbledore was the epitome of goodness, you took that to mean that he was something of a benevolent god figure. Rowling made that clear in every interview I have seen or read that addressed the issue that was not meant to be the case. Your fallacy, if there is one here is that you set up a story in your mind that you wanted to read, outcomes that you desired, and when Ms. Rowling wrote a different story, you became unhappy with it. Now that's okay. Certainly, I have read books, even entire series of books in which I disagree with the story that the author writes. One of them very, very popular. Still, not only will you never hear me yell "Vampires don't sparkle" when another person who doesn't like Meyers vampire story makes that argument I always say "Stephanie Meyers vampires do sparkle and that's okay. It's her story." Part of that is of course that I don't really care about whether vampires sparkle or not. That's up to the author. I have other problems with that set of books and I choose to simply not be involved with them other than in a very peripheral way. I believe that we as readers need to remember that someone else originally envisioned the story of the books we read. Sure, we can interpret and accept or not accept the story as written in the longterm, but the person who wrote the story had an idea of what she intended to say. Let the writer say that thing with as open a mind as possible. If the process makes you feel that your mind is more like a wide open hole than a sieve that can collect something valuable, then maybe it's not the story for you.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]